Australia AUSTRALIA - 4YO AUGUST (GUS) Missing from rural family home in Outback, Yunta, South Australia, 27th Sept 2025

[Ellery84]

I thought police might have taken the mixer at some point for forensic examination.

They’ll probably do that in 5 months when they get around to it.

MOO

That location looks very different from ground level and a different angle from the pictures I've previously seen. I think it's the same place after looking at the whole video, but I did wonder.

 

[AmoryK]

https://twitter.com/x/status/2032001383428472924

I wonder what the items of interest taken from the living room are, and whether they were only taken from the living room in particular because that’s where such items live (eg police wanted to examine a TV and the living room happens to be its home) or whether SAPOL have identified the living room as a possible crime scene and so took some items from there to examine.

If it were the latter of those reasons, then that suggests Gus, and presumably Shannon and Ronnie, were in the living room for most of that day. All just my thoughts and speculation: Did an accident happen when Shannon went to cook the evening meal, or was ‘cooking the evening meal’ just an excuse to explain why she hadn’t checked Gus for a while in the ‘playing out in the dirt and disappeared’ story?

Was an item in the living room used to reprimand Gus, leading to his death? Was Ronnie involved somehow, eg Gus woke him? Was Hus fussing his little brother out of boredom, leading to a loss of temper? Was Gus left alone in the living room and suffered a preventable accident because unsafe items were left out or something like power sockets weren’t safe?

Are the police looking for microscopic amounts of blood on the items they’ve taken?

 

[JLZ]

I wonder what the items of interest taken from the living room are, and whether they were only taken from the living room in particular because that’s where such items live (eg police wanted to examine a TV and the living room happens to be its home) or whether SAPOL have identified the living room as a possible crime scene and so took some items from there to examine.

If it were the latter of those reasons, then that suggests Gus, and presumably Shannon and Ronnie, were in the living room for most of that day. All just my thoughts and speculation: Did an accident happen when Shannon went to cook the evening meal, or was ‘cooking the evening meal’ just an excuse to explain why she hadn’t checked Gus for a while in the ‘playing out in the dirt and disappeared’ story?

Was an item in the living room used to reprimand Gus, leading to his death? Was Ronnie involved somehow, eg Gus woke him? Was Hus fussing his little brother out of boredom, leading to a loss of temper? Was Gus left alone in the living room and suffered a preventable accident because unsafe items were left out or something like power sockets weren’t safe?

Are the police looking for microscopic amounts of blood on the items they’ve taken?

If it was my living room, it would be a couple of computers, around 20kg of paper files, various diaries/planners, sundry papers either not yet filed or not yet binned.

 

[BreakingNews]

I wondered if there was shearing in progress on the outback station at the time of Gus’s disappearance. If so could he have somehow finished up in a wool press and been died.

I think shearing had finished

 

[gerardo20]

I wonder what the items of interest taken from the living room are, and whether they were only taken from the living room in particular because that’s where such items live (eg police wanted to examine a TV and the living room happens to be its home) or whether SAPOL have identified the living room as a possible crime scene and so took some items from there to examine.

My understanding is they were interested in that room because it has a view of the sandpit where Shannon says she last saw Gus.

Shannon may have stated she saw him last from that room, and they may think they have a way to either corroberate that she was in that room, or perhaps to find another inconsistency.

OR

They may may be trying to apply pressure by giving the impression they are seeking to discredit something she has said.

OR, as others have said they may be checking for traces of an incident that occurred in that room.

 

[Ellery84]

My understanding is they were interested in that room because it has a view of the sandpit where Shannon says she last saw Gus.

Shannon may have stated she saw him last from that room, and they may think they have a way to either corroberate that she was in that room, or perhaps to find another inconsistency.

OR

They may may be trying to apply pressure by giving the impression they are seeking to discredit something she has said.

OR, as others have said they may be checking for traces of an incident that occurred in that room.

Maybe they are looking for DNA, boood or hair follicles? Who even knows at this point. It seems to me like a case of too little too late, but I hope I’m wrong.

 

[Ruminations]

I thought police might have taken the mixer at some point for forensic examination.

That location looks very different from ground level and a different angle from the pictures I've previously seen. I think it's the same place after looking at the whole video, but I did wonder.

Regarding searching through dry, sandy dirt: many tools would be appropriate. The mixer would be handy to find things of a significant higher density than the dirt and bigger chunks. It could also quickly wash caked dirt off of chunky things. A screen/sifter would be ideal for finer exploration.

Regarding the landscape: I have noticed that the arial views of the property make it seem much flatter than it appears from eye level.

I find myself trying to imagine what the property looked like at dusk and after dark, with LE arriving. I imagine that, depending on the moon phase (appears to have been 1/4 moon approx.) it would be really dark looking from the house into the distance, and looking upon the lights on in the house/from vehicles from the distance would have looked really bright and obvious. I imagine that after dark with the lights on in the house, one could see their way back to the house from quite a distance.

I try to think what it was like for LE when they first arrived. If Gus had wandered off, it would have been easier to find him after dark because he would, I think, have had the lights to orient him, and would probably head home if he were moving (rather than injured and immobile). UNLESS, it is much less flat than I think, and of course Gus is shorter than adults, making hills that much bigger in comparison.

If someone deliberately harmed him, it probably happened in daylight. If the 5:00, 5:30 times are fiction, they had to have been deliberately chosen for some reason. Were there a lot of phone calls at 5:30 that needed to be explained? Was 5:30 the time all adults would be reunited in the evening? Was it truly the typical routine, that Gus would play at that time, then come back for a bath, dinner and wind down for the evening?

LE keeps emphasizing that the parents are not suspects.

Shannon acting more or less alone theory: 5:30 was chosen because it was the latest time possible. That's when Josie and/or Jess would come home and it would be known by more than Shannon that Gus was missing shortly after 5:30. If that is accurate, it means only Shannon could be the one who gave the suspicious shifting time lines, which I suppose is plausible regarding the rest of the day. It means only one person was responding to Gus' disappearance deceptively when LE appeared. BUT: It does not make any sense at all for Shannon to kill her grandchild she could simply evict instead, nor does it make sense for her to cover for an accident.

Josie acting with Shannon: 5:30 could be the time chosen because soon after that time, Jess would know Gus is missing. The inconsistent time lines could be either or both grandparents. For example, if Josie and Jess gave contradictory time lines it could be something like both said Josie went back to get sandwiches for herself and Jess, but Jess said it took much longer than Josie said it took. BUT: again it does not make any sense for either grandparent to kill a child they could evict, and covering up an accident is even harder to imagine with two people present.

After an accident, the energy would go to making it explainable to the mother, not LE, IMO.

Edited to add Josie acting mostly alone: I doubt that highly because for some reason, there appears to be almost no sign of Gus. For Josie to have killed, hidden and cleaned the evidence all while also pretending to search for Gus from 5:30 forward sounds farther fetched to me than her being involved with some clean up help at an earlier time. Also, since the time frame is so short, something would have been a big clue in retrospect to someone. She immediately changed her clothes instead of immediately searched? Something like that after a few days would have come to Shannon and/or Jess' mind,

Then: I have trouble believing that neither Jess nor Josh, being unaware that Shannon and/or Josie murdered Gus, would not become convinced that he was kidnapped. What else would they think, if they did not suspect each other or the grandparents? In my controversial opinion, failure to put up flyers around town and use social media (or have volunteers do so on their behalf) means that they had ruled out abduction prematurely. Or if not prematurely, with extreme logic that I don't think I could muster up in the circumstances.

MOO

 

[ReadySet]

Years ago when I first started following missing children, I agreed with others that a child who died by accident would not be covered up by caretakers, they would call for help.

But I have changed my mind.

What if a caretaker was abusing substances and was impaired? They knew or should know you can't take care of children when they're abusing substances. So even if death was accidental , they could be held responsible.

What if a caretaker was on the phone, gambling on line, sleeping? And it was obvious that child could not have died without a long period of lack of supervision?

Caretaker could believe, whether it was true or not, that they would never be forgiven, or they would be charged, and at the time believe it better to make up a story than face the consequences.

 

[Serononin]

Regarding searching through dry, sandy dirt: many tools would be appropriate. The mixer would be handy to find things of a significant higher density than the dirt and bigger chunks. It could also quickly wash caked dirt off of chunky things. A screen/sifter would be ideal for finer exploration.

Regarding the landscape: I have noticed that the arial views of the property make it seem much flatter than it appears from eye level.

I find myself trying to imagine what the property looked like at dusk and after dark, with LE arriving. I imagine that, depending on the moon phase (appears to have been 1/4 moon approx.) it would be really dark looking from the house into the distance, and looking upon the lights on in the house/from vehicles from the distance would have looked really bright and obvious. I imagine that after dark with the lights on in the house, one could see their way back to the house from quite a distance.

I try to think what it was like for LE when they first arrived. If Gus had wandered off, it would have been easier to find him after dark because he would, I think, have had the lights to orient him, and would probably head home if he were moving (rather than injured and immobile). UNLESS, it is much less flat than I think, and of course Gus is shorter than adults, making hills that much bigger in comparison.

If someone deliberately harmed him, it probably happened in daylight. If the 5:00, 5:30 times are fiction, they had to have been deliberately chosen for some reason. Were there a lot of phone calls at 5:30 that needed to be explained? Was 5:30 the time all adults would be reunited in the evening? Was it truly the typical routine, that Gus would play at that time, then come back for a bath, dinner and wind down for the evening?

LE keeps emphasizing that the parents are not suspects.

Shannon acting more or less alone theory: 5:30 was chosen because it was the latest time possible. That's when Josie and/or Jess would come home and it would be known by more than Shannon that Gus was missing shortly after 5:30. If that is accurate, it means only Shannon could be the one who gave the suspicious shifting time lines, which I suppose is plausible regarding the rest of the day. It means only one person was responding to Gus' disappearance deceptively when LE appeared. BUT: It does not make any sense at all for Shannon to kill her grandchild she could simply evict instead, nor does it make sense for her to cover for an accident.

Josie acting with Shannon: 5:30 could be the time chosen because soon after that time, Jess would know Gus is missing. The inconsistent time lines could be either or both grandparents. For example, if Josie and Jess gave contradictory time lines it could be something like both said Josie went back to get sandwiches for herself and Jess, but Jess said it took much longer than Josie said it took. BUT: again it does not make any sense for either grandparent to kill a child they could evict, and covering up an accident is even harder to imagine with two people present.

After an accident, the energy would go to making it explainable to the mother, not LE, IMO.

Edited to add Josie acting mostly alone: I doubt that highly because for some reason, there appears to be almost no sign of Gus. For Josie to have killed, hidden and cleaned the evidence all while also pretending to search for Gus from 5:30 forward sounds farther fetched to me than her being involved with some clean up help at an earlier time. Also, since the time frame is so short, something would have been a big clue in retrospect to someone. She immediately changed her clothes instead of immediately searched? Something like that after a few days would have come to Shannon and/or Jess' mind,

Then: I have trouble believing that neither Jess nor Josh, being unaware that Shannon and/or Josie murdered Gus, would not become convinced that he was kidnapped. What else would they think, if they did not suspect each other or the grandparents? In my controversial opinion, failure to put up flyers around town and use social media (or have volunteers do so on their behalf) means that they had ruled out abduction prematurely. Or if not prematurely, with extreme logic that I don't think I could muster up in the circumstances.

MOO

I seem to remember reading early on that Shannon said she noticed Gus was missing when she went out to call him for dinner, so perhaps 5:30 was his usual dinner time?

 

[musicaljoke]

Years ago when I first started following missing children, I agreed with others that a child who died by accident would not be covered up by caretakers, they would call for help.

But I have changed my mind.

What if a caretaker was abusing substances and was impaired? They knew or should know you can't take care of children when they're abusing substances. So even if death was accidental , they could be held responsible.

What if a caretaker was on the phone, gambling on line, sleeping? And it was obvious that child could not have died without a long period of lack of supervision?

Caretaker could believe, whether it was true or not, that they would never be forgiven, or they would be charged, and at the time believe it better to make up a story than face the consequences.

That could be true. However, it is very difficult to accidentally murder someone without leaving evidence.

I've seen that family members are sometimes ruthlessly accused of murdering their missing child when there seems to be no evidence of where the child went. It's like we default to that reason for their disappearance when the mystery is baffling.

 

[RedHaus]

It's probably been used by LE to sift through the dirt- it would be weird if there is not one little minion figurine, shards from broken sand pit tools and toys, wheels that snapped off a toy vehicle, "stolen" kitchen utensils .... a four year old can make a good 20 -40 minutes of fun with dirt and a stick as a toy, but if this pit was a regular play spot for him, as I believe was reported, even if he didn't bring more than a stick with him to the pit the afternoon he disappeared, (assuming the reported time line is true), certainly on other days he would have brought in other toys and tools.

If nothing of Gus's is in that dirt, that could be suspicious.

MOO

And we were told via early reporting, presumably from LE statements, that wee Gus was playing in the dirt pile with a shovel. We have heard nothing since about that shovel, not even a description for the public to be on the lookout for.

I've said all along. Find the shovel, find Gus. Unless of course, as I now suspect, that was a fabricated detail from the grandparents. That is a loose end.

 

[Kemug]

Gus's shovel - it's all getting a bit fuzzy going that far back, isn't it? What I do remember is that people were mentioning it, and that puzzled me, because I didn't recall having read about it. IIRC, I did look back a bit and didn't find anything. Perhaps I should have been more thorough. I didn't realise it might become quite important. What I do remember thinking is "Where are all the sandpit toys?" - not just a little shovel or trowel, but also containers, buckets, little trucks or cars. I would have been making a road for my little cars.
I don't suppose anyone has access to a program to run all the reports and comments through, to see if the "shovel" was ever anything more than a supposition.

 

[Kemug]

Rather than use a cement mixer, how hard would it be for LE to borrow a proper soil sifter from the Dept of Archaeology at one the Universities in Adelaide? I don't think a cement mixer would be much use.

 

[Marg944]

Gus's shovel - it's all getting a bit fuzzy going that far back, isn't it? What I do remember is that people were mentioning it, and that puzzled me, because I didn't recall having read about it. IIRC, I did look back a bit and didn't find anything. Perhaps I should have been more thorough. I didn't realise it might become quite important. What I do remember thinking is "Where are all the sandpit toys?" - not just a little shovel or trowel, but also containers, buckets, little trucks or cars. I would have been making a road for my little cars.
I don't suppose anyone has access to a program to run all the reports and comments through, to see if the "shovel" was ever anything more than a supposition.

I posted this on March 5….


I wonder if the little shovel was found?




Gus was last seen playing in a mound of dirt with a little shovel in his hand at the front of the homestead on the remote station about 5pm, according to police.”

What we know about search for missing boy on sheep station

Authorities are searching for a missing four-year-old boy on a sheep grazing station in the mid-north of South Australia. Here's what we know about the search so far.

www.abc.net.au

 

[SouthAussie]

Gus's shovel - it's all getting a bit fuzzy going that far back, isn't it? What I do remember is that people were mentioning it, and that puzzled me, because I didn't recall having read about it. IIRC, I did look back a bit and didn't find anything. Perhaps I should have been more thorough. I didn't realise it might become quite important. What I do remember thinking is "Where are all the sandpit toys?" - not just a little shovel or trowel, but also containers, buckets, little trucks or cars. I would have been making a road for my little cars.
I don't suppose anyone has access to a program to run all the reports and comments through, to see if the "shovel" was ever anything more than a supposition.

Wed 1 Oct 2025
Gus was last seen playing in a mound of dirt with a little shovel in his hand at the front of the homestead on the remote station about 5pm, according to police.

When his grandmother went to check on him, he was nowhere to be seen.
Police said the family searched for about three hours before alerting police, who arrived about 9:30pm that night.

What we know about search for missing boy on sheep station

Authorities are searching for a missing four-year-old boy on a sheep grazing station in the mid-north of South Australia. Here's what we know about the search so far.

www.abc.net.au

 

[Kemug]

OK, thanks Marg and South!

 

[hoodunnit]

Rather than use a cement mixer, how hard would it be for LE to borrow a proper soil sifter from the Dept of Archaeology at one the Universities in Adelaide? I don't think a cement mixer would be much use.

Surely LE would have sifters etc in their forensics equipment kit.

 

[Kemug]

Yes you're right, they should.

 

[AmoryK]

That could be true. However, it is very difficult to accidentally murder someone without leaving evidence.

I've seen that family members are sometimes ruthlessly accused of murdering their missing child when there seems to be no evidence of where the child went. It's like we default to that reason for their disappearance when the mystery is baffling.

I don’t think it’s difficult to accidently kill someone - especially a child. They could drown unattended in the bath (one of my theories), they could hang themselves while unattended, eg in the cords of window blinds, they could bang their head or suffer an injury from a reprimanding blow from a caregiver, they could eat something they shouldn’t while unattended, they could choke, they could drink a noxious substance, etc.

Also, I do believe that some people would cover up an accident. Easier to say a child has wondered off than you were responsible for their death.

 

[nao]

Moo...has it been said that no shovel or toys were found. ?